Second Front (that new in development tactical game)

[Zovs]

I think she means paper maps as opposed to mounted maps. AH mostly created mounted maps to their demise. SPI set the standard with non-mounted maps (aka paper maps).

Paper maps is the only way to go.

ASL uses thicker hard paper maps but no one uses mounted maps any more it’s too expensive.

[MrsWargamer]

ORIGINAL: Challerain

I'd have to disagree with the not many games sold on boards comment. Lots of top notch stuff being released by Compass, GMT, MMP among others.

As was observed after the above comment. Boards means BOARDS. A paper map is cheaper and less costly of course, and more realistic for marketing and shipping. And most gamers will just place plexiglass over a mapsheet. ASL has gone to using a rigid card stock, not paper, but not fully rigid. And once you have like 60+ boards, them things get heavy.

[Zovs]

Yeah, lol. I still have my original like 45 or so hard mounted geo's plus both HH and SoF DASL hard maps. Plus the 70 or so hard stock. Plus all the HASL ones...what a mess, but the rule book out weights them all...lol

[Challerain]

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer

ORIGINAL: Challerain

I'd have to disagree with the not many games sold on boards comment. Lots of top notch stuff being released by Compass, GMT, MMP among others.

As was observed after the above comment. Boards means BOARDS. A paper map is cheaper and less costly of course, and more realistic for marketing and shipping. And most gamers will just place plexiglass over a mapsheet. ASL has gone to using a rigid card stock, not paper, but not fully rigid. And once you have like 60+ boards, them things get heavy.

Sorry, my bad.

One thing I have noticed is that GMT is putting mounted maps on P500 for those that want to pay extra. Picked them up for Holland '44.

[Hexagon]

There are a pair of new pics and videos, but this is the most interesting because shows game moving... a kitty fight [:D]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBf_MjnLcp8

I like destroy a vehicle could leave a crew in battlefield (if game offer a campaign mode even loosing a vehicle you could try save crew to fight other day) and the slow shell effect when is a kill... because i understand that when you see the shell it is going to hurt [8|]

[Infierno]

This game is looking very promising. Like a mix between ASL and Steel Panthers. Love the look of it!

[DownNOut]

Another new video was posted.

[wodin]

There will be a campaign

ORIGINAL: Hexagon

There are a pair of new pics and videos, but this is the most interesting because shows game moving... a kitty fight [:D]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBf_MjnLcp8

I like destroy a vehicle could leave a crew in battlefield (if game offer a campaign mode even loosing a vehicle you could try save crew to fight other day) and the slow shell effect when is a kill... because i understand that when you see the shell it is going to hurt [8|]

[demyansk]

I like the way it looks, sort of a Battle Academy.

[MrsWargamer]

ORIGINAL: demyansk

I like the way it looks, sort of a Battle Academy.

Yeah, I mean, every time I hear the term "cartoony" I nearly want to scream.

I think Battle Academy has been about the most innovative design wargaming has been in 20 years.
In 20 years, everyone and their grandma has made wargames that look like yet another nato counter image using concept. And regardless of how awesome some might think Gary's games are, the truth is, it IS just more of the same.

Second Front might well completely blow us away the way Steel Panthers once did.

I don't mind top-down tactical graphics. But what is the point of beating that to death if our computers have so much more processing power today? The graphics I'm seeing in this game, are really fun looking.

Our wargames do NOT have to be sterile-looking boredom magnets.

[RangerJoe]

I would like a game to be challenging even if with "poor" graphics. I would hate a game with nice graphics if it was hard to use, and not challenging.

[MrsWargamer]

ORIGINAL: RangerJoe

I would like a game to be challenging even if with "poor" graphics. I would hate a game with nice graphics if it was hard to use, and not challenging.

That's kinda vague. Challenging vs the AI? Considering that AI as it exists in wargaming is lucky to better than a distracted 6-year-old how could it be challenging to begin with. Challenging vs a human. Well, that depends on your human opponent. I've played simple games to run, against humans, capable wargaming humans, and they are not always a challenge. It's not always about the game.

The main challenge with a game like Gary's War in the East, is getting a human opponent who has enough time to play it. That's nothing to do with the games graphics of course. It's all about the game's design as a whole. A turn in Battle Academy is at best a 5 minute pause while your human opponent does their turn. There's no real challenge to finishing the game in a single sitting, providing your opponent chose a moment when they had an hour to play to start with. In the past, I've played 5 separate battles vs 5 separate persons all at the same time. And that's no real challenge. At least not to me. I wouldn't expect ANYONE to try that with Gary's titles. No one has THAT much time.

I wanted to like Tigers on the Hunt. But the thing is, the interface is just not well thought out. It's just not relevant how much the design has emulated the target original game. The only challenge to it seems to be liking the interface.

I could say much the same about World in Flames. Nice hard cover books though.

[RangerJoe]

Right now, I only play against the AI due to various reasons. But I do plan on playing PBEM. I have played face to face board games as well as hot seat computer games. I can play all day if I want to.

[RFalvo69]

ORIGINAL: Zovs
ASL uses thicker hard paper maps but no one uses mounted maps any more it’s too expensive.

Unless you are the World in Flames Collector's Edition [8D]

[wodin]

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer

ORIGINAL: demyansk

I like the way it looks, sort of a Battle Academy.

I don't mind top-down tactical graphics. But what is the point of beating that to death if our computers have so much more processing power today? The graphics I'm seeing in this game, are really fun looking.

Our wargames do NOT have to be sterile-looking boredom magnets.

My thoughts exactly. Though some of my fav maps are top down 2D. So that look can be visually amazing. Some stunners out there, three off the top of my head are Bloody April by GMT map, GD'42 and Streets of Stalingrad map ( scenario mod for Battlefront game by SSG has a cracking Stalingrad map based on Streets of Stalingrad, I always think its such a waste that map, a game should be based on it with AI).

[IslandInland]

I want 2D graphics in my wargames. I guess I'm old school.

[RFalvo69]

ORIGINAL: MrsWargamer

I think Battle Academy has been about the most innovative design wargaming has been in 20 years.
In 20 years, everyone and their grandma has made wargames that look like yet another nato counter image using concept.

I think that Combat Mission beat Battle Academy in moving on from 2D to 3D graphics. And naval war games like Fighting Steel already sported 3D in the ‘90s.

[MrsWargamer]

Yeah, but Battle Academy is a dozen times better a game.

[rico21]

I don't know if Battle Mission is better than Combat Academy in the race at the best wargames.[:D]
I know a lot of wargames(especially those without editor) are far away.[8D]

[MrsWargamer]

ORIGINAL: rico21

I don't know if Battle Mission is better than Combat Academy in the race at the best wargames.[:D]
I know a lot of wargames(especially those without editor) are far away.[8D]

Yeah, but they are board games that don't use moronic AIs